TBM-700 crash at KEFT

Hiboglossi

The Most Depressing Person
TBM-700 crashes in quarry near the Monroe, Wisconsin Municipal Airport on Monday evening, apparently on a go-around from an approach. Both occupants of the aircraft perished, and there was a significant post-crash fire in the quarry. KEFT was reporting 1/4 mile visibility and 300' ceilings.

 
Interestingly there was an SETP paper this year demonstrating that the P-51 “torque roll” is due to the left wing stalling due to prop wash induced AoA differences rather than insufficient control authority.
 
Interestingly there was an SETP paper this year demonstrating that the P-51 “torque roll” is due to the left wing stalling due to prop wash induced AoA differences rather than insufficient control authority.

Huh... never knew the reason.
Just knew to NOT slap the power forward all at once

If you have a link, send it my way.

(need more input)
[IIIIIIINPUT!!!]
 
Huh... never knew the reason.
Just knew to NOT slap the power forward all at once

If you have a link, send it my way.

(need more input)
[IIIIIIINPUT!!!]
Johnny 5 collects data! also interested in keeping my TP knowledge up to date - is it SFTE or SETP which is better?
 
If you are an SFTE member you have guest access to the SETP Papers database, this was a 2025 symposium paper.
 
Huh... never knew the reason.
Just knew to NOT slap the power forward all at once

If you have a link, send it my way.

(need more input)
[IIIIIIINPUT!!!]
P-51 is specified. Is this applicable to all large fighters of the day - Corsairs, Bearcats, et al? Also - why do you never hear of European fighters torque rolling? Better training for relatively more rare/expensive? Or they happen and we don't hear because it's overseas?
 
If you are an SFTE member you have guest access to the SETP Papers database, this was a 2025 symposium paper.

Great read.
I like that it doesn't disprove any single concept, but adds an additional factor (slipstream altering left wing AOA) as a compounding factor.

It reinforces the same techniques with an addition consideration.

A comparison of the P51 vs the TBM and PC12 might be useful to newer pilots and/or owner/operators.
 
P-51 is specified. Is this applicable to all large fighters of the day - Corsairs, Bearcats, et al? Also - why do you never hear of European fighters torque rolling? Better training for relatively more rare/expensive? Or they happen and we don't hear because it's overseas?
Back in the olden times Aircraft Cylinder & Turbine sponsored the Rare Bear and quite often after we'd blow up an engine, because we had no spare, once we got the engine off of the airplane and transported it back to their facility in N. Hollywood several crew members would shift from working on the airplane in the hangar to assisting on the engine at the engine shop, myself included.

AC&T had a test cell that was basically an 18-wheeler with a shortish trailer. Towards the front of that trailer there a little enclosed cab with all of the gages and controls that faced aft with window that looked at a structure that was built to accept engine mounts for most of the common radial engines that they worked on. So you'd mount an engine mount on the the back of the trailer. Hang an engine off the back of the trailer and head for an airport (KWHP was right down the street, but eventually they started complaining so that truck/stand ended up having to go to Mojave) to test it. Once you got to the airport you'd mount a test club. A test club is a wooden fixed pitch prop that was calibrated so accurate performance testing could be performed using charts, graphs and calibrated instruments while also moving enough air to keep the cylinder head and oil temps under control using some weird generic rattle-trap cowl/oil cooler contraption during prolonged break in runs.

We were never able to run our engines at full power on the test stand, they tried that once and the trailer started to lift the tires on one side almost off of the ground before they got things under control. So we'd do the preliminary testing on the stand, take it off, transport it to Van Nuys, mount it and that big three-blade prop on the airplane and start testing it again. We had no way to securely chain the airplane down to the ground at three points but we could connect the tail hook structure securely enough to at least keep it from moving forward under a decent amount of power.

Even that was not enough to put full smash on the engine because it would start lifting the right MLG tire off the ground at about 70% of what the engine could deliver. Some of my best memories of working on that thing took place at probably 1-2am with the thing chained down just making beautiful noises with the entire exhaust system glowing red hot and blue/white flames shooting out halfway down both sides of the fuselage. Then we'd tow it back to the hangar and look it over, if everything looked okay we'd all go home and let the thing cool off. Then we'd show up the next day, look it over again and if everything was okay we'd cowl it up, load it for bear and kick it out the door so we could finally put the full beans to it, nitrous and everything, in the air because that was the only place to get accurate numbers about how much power this engine was actually making.

The point is the airplane could've torque rolled from a dead stop on the ground. Think about the rotating mass of hardened steel and aluminum in that situation, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction.
 
Last edited:
Back in the olden times Aircraft Cylinder & Turbine sponsored the Rare Bear and quite often after we'd blow up an engine, because we had no spare, once we got the engine off of the airplane and transported it back to their facility in N. Hollywood several crew members would shift from working on the airplane in the hangar to assisting on the engine at the engine shop, myself included.

AC&T had a test cell that was basically an 18-wheeler with a shortish trailer. Towards the front of that trailer there a little enclosed cab with all of the gages and controls that faced aft with window that looked at a structure that was built to accept engine mounts for most of the common radial engines that they worked on. So you'd mount an engine mount on the the back of the trailer. Hang an engine off the back of the trailer and head for an airport (KWHP was right down the street, but eventually they started complaining so that truck/stand ended up having to go to Mojave) to test it. Once you got to the airport you'd mount a test club. A test club is a wooden fixed pitch prop that was calibrated so accurate performance testing could be performed using charts, graphs and calibrated instruments while also moving enough air to keep the cylinder head and oil temps under control using some weird generic rattle-trap cowl/oil cooler contraption during prolonged break in runs.

We were never able to run our engines at full power on the test stand, they tried that once and the trailer started to lift the tires on one side almost off of the ground before they got things under control. So we'd do the preliminary testing on the stand, take it off, transport it to Van Nuys, mount it and that big three-blade prop on the airplane and start testing it again. We had no way to securely chain the airplane down to the ground at three points but we could connect the tail hook structure securely enough to at least keep it from moving forward under a decent amount of power.

Even that was not enough to put full smash on the engine because it would start lifting the right MLG tire off the ground at about 70% of what the engine could deliver. Some of my best memories of working on that thing took place at probably 1-2am with the thing chained down just making beautiful noises with the entire exhaust system glowing red hot and blue/white flames shooting out halfway down both sides of the fuselage. Then we'd tow it back to the hangar and look it over, if everything looked okay we'd all go home and let the thing cool off. Then we'd show up the next day, look it over again and if everything was okay we'd cowl it up, load it for bear and kick it out the door so we could finally put the full beans to it, nitrous and everything, in the air because that was the only place to get accurate numbers about how much power this engine was actually making.

The point is the airplane could've torque rolled from a dead stop on the ground. Think about the rotating mass of hardened steel and aluminum in that situation, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction.
Sorry to quote my own post but thought I'd just add something.

Radial engines leak oil, if they don't leak oil they're probably out of oil, and if they're out of oil they'll still drip oil. That test stand was just an oily mess from stem to stern, it was a miserable place to be. That little cab had no A/C and if you opened a window you'd get a face full of exhaust, hot air and oil, and they were doing this in Mojave in the summer. Sanford and Son would've told them to keep on rolling if it had ever stopped by. But I'd almost guarantee that truck or trailer didn't have a spot of corrosion. When I first met the Bearcat it hadn't had an engine on it for over a year and it had moved around a couple of times and it still had a little puddle of dirty engine oil underneath it.
 
Back
Top